Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Zyrusticae 04-14-07, 10:44 AM	Why is it such an incredible skill that it requires investment in so many, practically *unrelated* feats? Casters get AoE spells long before a nonfighter character can even qualify for the damned thing, and frankly, I don't see what's so difficult about swinging a blade in a 360 degree arc that requires such expertise. I mean, gawd, it should be a friggin' standard action that anybody can take, if only with some penalties (which the feat should helpfully not only remove, but turn into bonuses instead). Stuff like this really convinces me that non-casters were, indeed, created in a vacuum. *fighter uses whirlwind attack - opponents are still perfectly capable of fighting back at any moment* *caster casts web, then follows up with a fireball - opponents who failed the save can't do @#$% to the caster*
Majick 04-14-07, 11:28 AM	Whirlwind is an attack against every opponent you can reach at FULL BASE ATTACK, which is why it required the prerequisites. Improved Whirlwind is also available (it's from a dragon magazine) which allows you to follow up with your second/third/forth/etc. attacks affter your initial 'spinning doomy whirlwind thing' You might wanna consider the fact that fighting a horde of things suddenly becomes very easy when you get at least one almost sure thing attack per round against all of them ^^
Aryxbez 04-14-07, 11:52 AM	Also compared to a warblade, he can get a maneuver with the same power, at 7th level sure, but then it is even better than the feat the fighter had saved up for. A long time ago I had started a thread about how weak Whirlwind attack was. So in my campaign this is what Whirlwind attack changes, Just like whirlwind attack except: Prequisites: BAB+4, Combat Reflexes, Dex 15 Special: when wielding two weapons while using this attack, can make a second whirlwind attack using your off-hand weapon also take the TWF penalties for both whirlwind attacks if you choose to use this special option.
Zyrusticae 04-14-07, 01:40 PM	In my mind, I can't help but think of it in the realm of, say, Nightmare of Soul Calibur's ability to toss every soldier around him a considerable distance with a single swing of his (quite huge) blade. DnD's version isn't even close to this, and furthermore, spellcasters get spells that are *far* superior to simply attacking everybody within reach. I *really* don't think attacking everybody with my 'full base attack' is really that powerful. (Improved Whirlwind totally sucks, by the way, especially for an epic-level feat!) By the way, I don't find that altered version particularly helpful. A high Dex requirement? Combat reflexes? Looks like I'll be making my own version of the feat after all...
Aryxbez 04-14-07, 02:10 PM	Combat reflexes is put there to kinda make sense of the feat, since you need to know how to move about your attacks. Dex requirement is to prevent everyone from getting it too easily. besides 15 dex is not too hard, besides could just make it 13 dex, Problem solved. Otherwise, you truly know what goes in your campaign, so if you don't find my fix helpful, oh well and just make your own.
WolfHati 04-14-07, 04:39 PM	II always envisioned whirlwind attack to be a more quick and dextrous attack slashing and stabbing a whole bunch of people with blinding speed-- the feat for swinging your sword in a huge arc and dismembering a whole bunch of people is called great cleave.
Zyrusticae 04-14-07, 09:20 PM	Great cleave *requires* that you kill the opponent first. This doesn't account for the situation where someone, say, swings the blunt side of his sword in a full 360-degree arc and sends any enemies in range flying - but very definitely still alive. (Blame Soul Calibur for that one.)
runestar 04-14-07, 10:17 PM	Wotc probably wanted to make the feat harder to qualify as they felt that it was a very powerful feat. Actual gametest experience has been quite lacklustre though. It is actually quite a weak feat mechanically, simply because smart troop placement by a competent dm will easily negate any supposed benefits. I suppose they envisioned whirlwind as some sort of dexterous attack where you zip around the battlefield hitting everyone within range, thus the inclusion of mobility and spring attack as "flavour" prereq feats.
Jere_RB 04-14-07, 10:48 PM	Think of it less as to be used by the party fighter, and more to be used by the Gargantuan/Colossal BBEG to tag *every* member of the party...
Bopple 04-14-07, 11:53 PM	Think of it less as to be used by the party fighter, and more to be used by the Gargantuan/Colossal BBEG to tag *every* member of the party... Not useful, either. It's much better to diminish the total power of the enemies continually by killing one after another with the focused massive blows, rather than to let them all alive through the battle by doing small damages to all the enemies.
Riplox 04-15-07, 01:26 AM	Really, I think the prerequisites for W-Attack should be Power Attack, Cleave, Great Cleave. Cleave would be augmented so that you don't have to drop the opponent to get the extra attack. Then Great Cleave would expand upon Cleave with the ability to Cleave all opponents in a 180 degree arc. W-Attack would attack in a full 360 degrees and be the only action of the three that requires a full-round action.
runestar 04-15-07, 03:31 AM	Cleave in a 360 degree radius?:eek: Am I reading this correctly?
Zyrusticae 04-15-07, 08:32 AM	It's really not as powerful as you think, especially if you make it a higher-level feat (with a BAB requirement of, say, +8, like Stunning Fist has), at which point casters will have spells capable of eliminating entire swaths of enemies at once. Also, keep in mind that, unlike casters, melee characters have a very limited AoE as far as their attacks go, and it can be an extremely situational ability. A devious dm or, hell, devious enemies in general won't give the character the chance to cut up everybody at once.
runestar 04-15-07, 09:29 AM	Is someone forgetting bag of rats?:D
Nephlite 04-15-07, 11:52 AM	Why is it such an incredible skill that it requires investment in so many, practically *unrelated* feats? Casters get AoE spells long before a nonfighter character can even qualify for the damned thing, and frankly, I don't see what's so difficult about swinging a blade in a 360 degree arc that requires such expertise. I mean, gawd, it should be a friggin' standard action that anybody can take, if only with some penalties (which the feat should helpfully not only remove, but turn into bonuses instead). Stuff like this really convinces me that non-casters were, indeed, created in a vacuum. *fighter uses whirlwind attack - opponents are still perfectly capable of fighting back at any moment* *caster casts web, then follows up with a fireball - opponents who failed the save can't do @#$% to the caster* It is a +1 weapon ability. Why waste feats? It is much better to just get the ability. Saves you 4 feats.
MerlintheTuna 04-15-07, 01:20 PM	Not useful, either. It's much better to diminish the total power of the enemies continually by killing one after another with the focused massive blows, rather than to let them all alive through the battle by doing small damages to all the enemies.Well yes, tactically. But consider which is more fun for the players -- every character getting reduced to ~25% HP over the course of a fight, or two characters getting killed and two characters remaining untouched? The former introduces tension, the latter introduces half the team having nothing to do for part of the fight.
Aetheryn 04-15-07, 06:46 PM	Ooooh, the fighter blade whirlwind attack of doom! Doom for the fighter, that is.
Jere_RB 04-15-07, 08:24 PM	Not useful, either. It's much better to diminish the total power of the enemies continually by killing one after another with the focused massive blows, rather than to let them all alive through the battle by doing small damages to all the enemies. Actually, I was thinking less about the party fighter/tank and more about the *enemies* using whirlwind, especially those huge and up elementals that only get one slam attack per round. WW would do very nicely there.
runestar 04-15-07, 10:23 PM	Well yes, tactically. But consider which is more fun for the players -- every character getting reduced to ~25% HP over the course of a fight, or two characters getting killed and two characters remaining untouched? The former introduces tension, the latter introduces half the team having nothing to do for part of the fight. Are the players that weak that they can only win when the dm deliberately plays a monster to only a fraction of its true prowess? Where is the suspense and sense of danger/anticipation if the players know that they are assured of winning any fight because the dm will deliberately fudge combat to cater to them?:confused: They know they will never die. Or have any sort of debilitating effect cast on them....
Broken vacuum 04-16-07, 07:31 AM	It all depends on campaign and character, of course, but Whirlwind Attack is actually a pretty good deal for some characters - at least for a number of levels. The thing is that if you are almost certain to hit an opponent with your first attack, you are probably better off focusing all your attacks for the round on that opponent, but if it is not so certain, the follow up attacks are so uncertain that you are quite possibly better off utilising Whirlwind Attack when facing multiple opponents. For full BAB characters WA is quite possibly only really useful for a couple of levels. You can get it as early as 5th level (e.g. human Ranger 3/Fighter 2), where it is obviously useful and even in the following levels, opponents with CRs well below the party level can have ACs that make follow up attacks very uncertain (lizardfolk with class levels or something similar). Also a character with a spiked chain and WA buffed with Enlarge Person makes for a decent and very cheap AoE attack around 6th level or so. Nevertheless the quickly rising attack bonus of full BAB classes makes the window of utility rather small for WA. It can of course still be occasionally useful, but not nearly as much as during the earlier levels. Where it shines, though, is for multi-class characters with levels in classes that do not provide full BAB. If the earlier ranger/fighter would later take levels in e.g. shadowdancer, WA would stay useful a lot longer.
Jc3 04-17-07, 10:50 AM	Have I been playing this feat wrong for years? My interpretation is that you give up all your attacks and make a single attack (ie ONE attack roll of the die) that is applied against each opponent within reach. A player in my group recently suggested that instead you make one separate attack roll for EACH opponent within reach, so that if you're surrounded by 8 opponents, you get to make 8 attacks. If he's right, then this feat becomes significantly more powerful. Too powerful? What's your interpretation? Option 1: ONE attack, one dice roll applied against everyone within reach. Option 2: Multiple attacks, multiple dice rolls, with each one applied once against each opponent you can reach.
Silverthumb128 04-17-07, 12:44 PM	I only just today disscovered two things related to Whirlwind Attack: -Orc Blademaster PrC(based upon the Warcraft Blademaster) from Dragon #299 At 5th level, you gain the ability, while wielding a Bastard Sword, to make two Whirlwind Attacks as a Full-Round action, while forcing you to make a Fortitude save to avoid Fatigue. -Improved Whirlwind Attack from Dragon #343 With this feat, you actually get to, as part of a Full-Round Action, make all of your subsequent attacks granted from BAB after making a Whirlwind Attack. They don't get to be Whirlwind Attacks themselves, but still, that's a lot of hits. Combining either of these with Great Cleave or Supreme Cleave(if you can get it) will make you a Walking Fireball. :D
MerlintheTuna 04-17-07, 01:53 PM	If he's right, then this feat becomes significantly more powerful. Too powerful? Option 1: ONE attack, one dice roll applied against everyone within reach. Option 2: Multiple attacks, multiple dice rolls, with each one applied once against each opponent you can reach.I'd go with option 2. It doesn't make the feat any more powerful, simply less random; instead of all-or-nothing swings, he'll end up making a mess of swings, some of which will hit and some of which won't. The latter method is actually likely weaker, since it prevents the use of abilities like Quickened True Strike, Arcane Strike, and other things that affect only a single attack.
Scion of Coldshard 04-17-07, 03:16 PM	What's your interpretation? Option 1: ONE attack, one dice roll applied against everyone within reach. Option 2: Multiple attacks, multiple dice rolls, with each one applied once against each opponent you can reach. Option 2. If you went with option 1 how would you adjucate your attack bonuses differing between various opponents? Such as if you are on a mount and 4 out of the 8 people around you were also mounted so that against some you get a +1 but not against the others. One of them you have flanked with a buddy so get +2 vs that guy but not anyone else. In addition you have a bane weapon that effects 3 out of the 8 which changes things even more. At this point you have so many different numbers for each what would you do if you only made one roll? Still, there is an easy answer to that ;) But I would still go with multiple attack rolls, the feat does say to make one attack roll against each and not to make one attack roll then apply it to all viable targets.
Random_cheesehead 04-17-07, 04:27 PM	The cheese invasion continues!Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese Cheese
UAMDB 04-17-07, 05:49 PM	Why is it such an incredible skill that it requires investment in so many, practically *unrelated* feats? Casters get AoE spells long before a nonfighter character can even qualify for the damned thing, and frankly, I don't see what's so difficult about swinging a blade in a 360 degree arc that requires such expertise. I mean, gawd, it should be a friggin' standard action that anybody can take, if only with some penalties (which the feat should helpfully not only remove, but turn into bonuses instead). Stuff like this really convinces me that non-casters were, indeed, created in a vacuum. *fighter uses whirlwind attack - opponents are still perfectly capable of fighting back at any moment* *caster casts web, then follows up with a fireball - opponents who failed the save can't do @#$% to the caster* Let try an experiment when you get the chance. Take a broom or mop, or just a long stick a walk in to some woods. The trees will represent Enemy NPC's. Now swing your "sword" once around and tell me how many you hit. Chances are you are going to hit one and stop your motion. Its easy to swing a sword in an arc over your head, but to actually hit multiple targets with one fluid motion is not easy. Thats why it requires many feats. As too is it a useful feat, thats a different subject.
Qwicksilver 04-17-07, 06:53 PM	I don't know if anyone has actually used the feat, I'm assuming some of you have. However, let me offer my perspective as someone who has just played a fighter who used whirlwind attack up to mid ranged levels. I played a fighter lvl7 up to about lvl11, he used a scythe and focused mostly on whirlwind attack, spring attack, and combat expertise. This was useful, considering those are all prerequisites for WA. I was fighting alongside a barbarian, so he was a decent marker to put myself up against in terms of similar battle roles. I found that WA seemed to hold its own against my friend's cleave and improved cleave for the first couple levels, not to mention that Combat Expertise allowed me to pump my AC up to mitigate my lower HP. However, as battles went on, even though there were still a decent number of enemies so that whirlwind and improved cleave would be used, whirlwind seemed to fall behind for me, especially because I had to drop BAB points to ensure that I wouldn't die. In a simple numbers game, it is more effective for one person to focus one one or two of the four enemies they are fighting in order to drop them as fast as possible, and deny them turns to damage you. Using Whirlwind Attack, assuming all attacks hit every time, each foe drops at the same time, meaning you are getting attacked more often by each foe. Combine that with the usefulness of cleave and improved cleave, then Whirlwind starts to fall back. Having said that, I have contemplated the uses of having a spiked chain fighter using whirlwind attack, which would further enhance the utility of whirlwind attack. I'm surprised to not see it on any of the chain fighter builds, except that there is the matter of the very high prerequisites. Lastly, I am contemplating homebrewing a prc that will take advantage of whirlwind attack, and turn it into sort of dervish who gets less attacks, but at higher BAB, combined with a number of other abilities. One of the last abilities I would have in store, is the ability to whirlwind around one single foe, always moving, but being able to attack that foe with his full BAB, as long as he can move around the foe.
ClementWillowbreaker 04-17-07, 07:15 PM	Nevertheless the quickly rising attack bonus of full BAB classes makes the window of utility rather small for WA. It can of course still be occasionally useful, but not nearly as much as during the earlier levels. Completely nonsensical. Your BAB goes up about as fast as enemy AC. You keep on getting more attacks...that are less and less likely to hit. Meanwhile Whirlwind Attacks are scaling just perfectly all the way to lvl20. Sure, it would be nice to get two hits on one target. But the second hit is 25% less likely to hit. I'd rather get two hits on two targets that are my best effort than hope I can pummel one down. And while it is harder to get three enemies together, that third attack you get at lvl11 is 50% less likely to hit. And as for smart DMs...since when do smart DMs leave all their soft, squishy archers and mages more than 15ft away from all support? You know, the soft, squishy ones you will be Springing+Mobility closing, then WWAing the next round? And before you say, "Wizard [whatever spell] you", if you make the wizard act against you immediately to save his skin, then you've neutralized him for one round. He has lost initiative. If your party wizard was casting Enlarge Person or Stoneskin instead of AoEing, you wouldn't be actually competing. You would be presenting a unified front instead of racing to do the same thing- kill multiple foes. And yes, a wizard can pummel a couple targets better than a Fighter...a couple times. A good wizard would realize that the Fighter with WWA is perfectly capable of killing them, and spend spell slots doing other things that aren't redundant.
runestar 04-17-07, 10:21 PM	Because whirlwind does not necessarily imply that you spin around in spot like some crazy top...:rolleyes: It just means that you make 1 attack at each target you want within reach. How you want to go about doing this is up to your discretion. It could mean you zip around the battlefield hitting each person once and return to your starting spot. Or thrust, withdraw and quickly move on to the next foe. Either way, does seem it will require a fair degree of training. Although my suspicion is that the heavy requirements were to balance out what was perceived to be a rather strong feat.:)
Silverthumb128 04-17-07, 10:58 PM	The cheese invasion continues! So does the spam invasion. But while I'm here, I think its funny that people whine about melee characters being substandard, and then they turn around and say that a Fighter with Whirlwind Attack, Great Cleave, & Knockdown is cheesy. Just saying.
Scion of Coldshard 04-17-07, 11:57 PM	So does the spam invasion. But while I'm here, I think its funny that people whine about melee characters being substandard, and then they turn around and say that a Fighter with Whirlwind Attack, Great Cleave, & Knockdown is cheesy. Just saying. Hmm.. I think that whirlwind is a little weak based on its prereqs, great cleave is typically a waste but cleave can come in pretty handy, and knockdown is incredibly powerful but using it with whirlwind is pretty funny (and since you do not get the extra attack from tripping people mitigates is power). Does that count? ;)
Silverthumb128 04-18-07, 12:47 AM	Hmm.. I think that whirlwind is a little weak based on its prereqs, great cleave is typically a waste but cleave can come in pretty handy, and knockdown is incredibly powerful but using it with whirlwind is pretty funny (and since you do not get the extra attack from tripping people mitigates is power). Does that count? ;) It counts well enough. :D But, although you don't get the extra attack from tripping via Knockdown, nothing stops you from getting the extra attack from the opponents standing(and you might have Combat Reflexes, its a good enough feat). If you happen to kill any of the opponents affected by the Whirling Knockdown or the subsequent AoO's, Great Cleave kicks in, and you can gain even more attacks against the surrounding enemies, depending on how many you kill during the loop. If you opt for Improved Whirlwind, as I mentioned earlier, you can get up to 3 more attacks after that(I'm not even gonna bother bringing up TWF). Like I said, Living Fireball. :D
Broken vacuum 04-19-07, 04:16 AM	Completely nonsensical. Your BAB goes up about as fast as enemy AC. I realise that experiences differ, but it is hardly nonsensical. Yes, for a lot of enemies the AC scales approximately with full BAB, which means that they are easier to hit at higher levels as characters also get higher bonuses to add to their BAB. You keep on getting more attacks...that are less and less likely to hit. Meanwhile Whirlwind Attacks are scaling just perfectly all the way to lvl20. Sure, it would be nice to get two hits on one target. But the second hit is 25% less likely to hit. I'd rather get two hits on two targets that are my best effort than hope I can pummel one down. And while it is harder to get three enemies together, that third attack you get at lvl11 is 50% less likely to hit. Except, of course, that in the later levels you will often have a much greater chance of hitting in the first place. And when you have 3 attacks and fight against 2 opponents the extra attack from WA must be compared to the 2 other attacks (at -5 and -10 respectively) you could get instead. Added to this is that the HP-system makes it so that it is better to have one completely downed and one completely healthy opponent than it is to have two opponents at half health. And as for smart DMs...since when do smart DMs leave all their soft, squishy archers and mages more than 15ft away from all support? You know, the soft, squishy ones you will be Springing+Mobility closing, then WWAing the next round? And before you say, "Wizard [whatever spell] you", if you make the wizard act against you immediately to save his skin, then you've neutralized him for one round. He has lost initiative. I do not really know what exactly you are referring to here, but let me answer anyway. If you have a soft squishy target it makes much more sense to spend a full attack on downing it and then turn to the rest, as that prevents said soft, squishy target from doing anything afterwards. It is not that WA is never useful at higher levels for full BAB types, but it is not useful as often as it is at lower levels. Exactly how often is of course campaign-dependent, but the difference is there.